The fishery and the common European fishery politics are not functioning well. Since the introduction of the common fishery politics in 1983, the stocks have gone down, as the fishery has become more effective. Today, most species are outside of the biologically safe boundaries – the fishery is unsustainable.

Everyone recognizes that this is so, but that is the end of agreement. For more than 10 years, the EU has worked for a reform of the fishery politics, but now – just one month prior to the passing of the reform – the situation is worse than ever. The agenda, which should have brought the reform process to its final conclusion in December, has been thrown over by the catastrophic conditions of several stocks, with the cod fish as the most prominent. At the same time as we are about to accept one of the most difficult reforms in the history of fishery politics, once again it is needed to cut down severely the already historically low quotas – it will be more than difficult, and maybe even impossible to conclude during the Danish EU chairmanship.

-         But why has it gone so terribly wrong with the fishery and the administration of the common European fishery politics?

There are several reasons, and one of the main is that the fishery is a trade, which is not yet mature in terms of regulations and administration, and it has a less than modern organizational structure. Until 1983, fishery was relatively unregulated, and without any actual fishery politics in the European countries. From 1983 however, the fish should be divided on the basis of historical rights. I.e. that the individual countries should have a right to catch an amount of fish, which was proportional to the amount, they had caught prior to 1983 – and in this way, the fish has been divided each year since.

This strategy for division caused that the common fishery politics became one big box, wherefrom each country should try to get as much fish as possible. The fight for the fish, which was conducted at sea between fishermen, was moved to shore, and into the bureaucratic systems. And here, the immature fishery trade was overmatched, when confronted with the many political deals and tactics, which are always going on in the EU. And only now, 20 years after the initiation of the fishery politics, the major European fishery organizations are about ready to take on the tasks, but because of the catastrophic conditions of the stocks, they have to fight/negociate with their back against the wall – in a fight, they seem to have already lost. They started out too late, and today they have already had their day, because they were not able to give a positive suggestion for the future fishery.

The European population, as it were, finds no positive stories about the fishery in the media – which is the main source of information today – only negative. Everything points downwards, and there seems to be no hope for the future fishery. Add to this the perspective of the taxpayers that they have to provide the many billions of Euro, which are needed for closing down large parts of an apparently dying trade.

The big vessels with enormous debts, as well as their organizations, have no future. But this does not mean that the fishery is without future. The fishery is going through a crisis now, no doubt about that, but the problems we face are economical problems, and like other economical problems, there is also a solution for the problems in fishery to be found – if there is a will to do it. Now, it is needed to spend many billion of Euro to take out the vessels, and the fishing methods, which have caused the catastrophically low stocks, and then the development of the fishery must be managed with due consideration of the influences from environmental and climatic changes, which are playing an ever larger role to the stocks. The fishery has a future, and in order to obtain the support from the populations around the EU in solving the contemporary problems, all actors within the fisheries, from the political decision makers to the individual fishermen, need something that point ahead, they need the good stories, told by the many fishermen, who are proud of their trade, and who carry out a fishery, which is not damaging nature, nor resources. These fishermen, however, are very rarely given the word in the public debate – and this for obvious reasons.

The many national and European conferences, seminars, workshops and meetings, which are shaping the substance of the common fishery politics, very rarely have attendance from active fishermen. Only politicians, civil servants, biologists, and professional representatives and consultants from the fishery- and environmental organizations, are deciding the development within fishery. The fishermen do not attend the meetings, among other reasons because they cannot afford it, since it might cost them the income from several days of fishing, when they go for meetings or seminars.

Most people agree it to be a significant problem that the fishery and the administration of the fishery is steered without active participation from the fishermen. Therefore, the EU fishery reform is suggesting that there should be established regional councils, within the future European fishery administration. In Living Sea , we support the establishment of these councils, but it is not enough – more is needed.

The task will be to create a trustable administrational connection between the fishery politics and the practical fishery, i.e. the difficulties that are attached to the fishery, the sea, and its resources, across the political and economical interests of the countries. For this purpose, the fishery politics needs a massive fishery professional input, an input which will include, on an objective, matter-of-fact basis, an account of the various forms of fishery and the possibilities of the tools and methods to live up the demands made by resource and environment management in the fishery today.

Seen from the outside, it is obvious to everyone that there are fishing methods, which better than others can meet the demands of a greater degree of sustainability, measured on the stocks, as well as on the eco system. The serious future fishery counselling must also be abloom to answer to the question of which kinds of fishery to aim for in the future, in order to create a more sustainable fishery with as few costs as possible – this is the positive story: that there exist kinds of fishery, which can meet the requirements that will be inevitable.

But here also, the fishermen meet a very serious problem. As a group, fishing on the same sea, with the same problems of storms, heavy sea, personalities, engine problems etc., the fishermen find it very difficult to criticize their colleagues in public. This is just not something that you do, even though in smaller groups, and outside the public space, it is possible in many places to agree that e.g. the rough trawl fishery is damaging the bottom, the marine environment, and hence also damaging other types of fishery. It is a fact, also among fishermen, that the trawl fishery has ousted the otherwise more sustainable fishery with Danish seine. But from recognizing this fact to joining front with other more sustainable fishing methods – to go up against the trawlers – this still represents a long way.

The fishermen are not going forward with critique of e.g. the trawl fishery, even though they are well aware that it represents the main reason why they have to leave their trade. However, there are some tendencies towards movement, and a more open internal criticism among fishermen. There exists now a more open debate and discussion in the organizations and in the fishermen’s own media, where the European fishery debate inspires more and more contributions, in which the fishermen themselves begin defencing the more sustainable – the real – fishery against the vast and effective, industrialized methods. There is movement in this field – and this movement should be supported by organizations and others, from outside – from society.

In Living Sea , we have since the founding in 1995, all the time tried to encourage a support for the sustainable, real fishery. This work has been done through several projects, and even though the results of the work seem quite modest, we have tried to hold on to the strategy which claims that there is a reasonable fishery, and that this fishery should have all the support it needs to survive in the struggle against the more brutal types of trawling.

One of our strategies has been to create a European network of coastal fishermen. We believe that there will be a need for such networks of professional fishermen and of European fishery organizations, which by means of common aims and values can work together for common advantages. The common European fishery politics needs and will also welcome such formalized networks of professional fishermen and fishery organizations, since they will be able to give feed back and suggestions for the common European fishery politics. Such organizations and networks could be established within the most important types of fishery, such as the European coastal fishery, industrial fishery, lobster fishery, beam trawling, herring and mackerel, etc.

This attempt of a verbal communication via the internet might be a tool for an extended cooperation between fishermen across the borders of the EU. We believe in this tool, and we also believe that it will be attractive to a lot of fishermen. It might seem a bit too technical, but when you look at the fishery today, you will see that the fishermen are surrounded by modern technique and means of communication in their steering houses. And this new instrument is certainly not more difficult to handle than the instruments needed in fishery today.

The fact that it is possible to talk together – that a fisherman from Bornholm can discuss with a fishermen from Portugal, and that they can get an English input to their conversation from Hastings, etc., this is the vital advantage in this new form of communication via the internet.

This is the first attempt, and we and many other have to learn from this attempt. Anyone with interests and some knowledge about the fishery can participate. You can participate actively, i.e. when you are online with writing and speech, or you can participate passively, just following the proceedings.

For more information look at the homepage www.living-sea.dk

For contacts and signing up – mail to llh@levende-hav.dk